Eileen Brady - IMAGE: nataliebehring.com
Brady’s ties go beyond her claim she is a co-founder and an original co-owner of the store. She was, according to early employees, one of the people who helped establish the progressive New Seasons ethos.
Brady has been on the defensive about some of those claims, however, since WW two weeks ago raised questions about her role as a founder and owner (“Extra Seasoning,” WW, Jan. 18, 2012).
WW cited the company’s financial disclosures to the Oregon Liquor Control Commission, which never listed Brady as an owner. The OLCC requires full disclosure of ownerships when granting licenses.
Brady says she worked behind the scenes, even though she was never employed by New Seasons or served on its board.
For example, Brady says she wrote the original employee handbook for New Seasons and effectively oversaw the company’s human resources until it hired a permanent HR director.
“We [New Seasons] didn’t have a human resources director for many years—five or six years,” Brady told WW. “I was the person that provided all the backup HR.”
Eileen Brady talks about her early role at New Seasons.
Part of building New Seasons’ culture, Brady says, was creating the document that outlined employees’ rights and responsibilities. “I wrote the first staff handbook,” Brady told WW.
The first handbook published, bound and distributed to employees, dated March 2001, expresses many of the ideas and themes that make New Seasons unique.
But the handbook also includes language that equates labor unions with “extremist” and “anti-human rights organizations”—groups the chain sought to ban from soliciting on company property.
The handbook also said New Seasons banned its employees from soliciting support for groups promoting an “old-style ‘company versus union’ adversarial employee relations system.”
Brady referred questions about the handbook to her husband, Brian Rohter, who was New Seasons’ founding president and later its CEO.
Rohter says Brady did indeed write the original draft of the handbook, but he takes responsibility for the published version that included anti-union language.
He says Brady’s original 47-page text was kept in a three-ring binder at stores for employees to read. Her version, he says, didn’t include any reference to unions.
In the fall of 2000, Rohter says, he revised the manual, adding sections after consulting with employees and lawyers. Rohter says he never showed Brady the changes, which included the comparison of unions to extremist groups.
“The comment about the union was a mistake on my part,” Rohter says of the ‘company vs. union’ language. “I brought it home and showed Eileen. Her comment was, ‘What the fuck is this?’”
Rohter says there is no discrepancy between Brady’s assertions that she was deeply involved in New Seasons’ human-resources issues, and his decision not to show her his changes to the handbook.
He says she was busy with her own full-time job and raising children. “I am not going to check with Eileen on feedback from an attorney,” he says.
Rohter says the language was intended to exclude right-wing groups, such as the Oregon Citizens Alliance, from gathering petition signatures at New Seasons stores.
He says he received other complaints, including from employees, and agreed to change the language. But Rohter says the company didn’t do so until 2005.
Later versions omitted the words “company versus union” but continued to ban “promoters of the old-style adversarial employee relations system.”
The language in the 2001 New Seasons handbook surprised two labor law experts WW asked to read it.
“Making this reference to ‘old-style’ unionism seems to be saying we have a different approach to management-employee relations,” says Elizabeth Ford, a professor who specializes in labor law at the University of Washington Law School. “It’s an interesting approach, but what an employer is not allowed to do is pick and choose groups for the employees.”
Ford says that provision may run afoul of the National Labor Relations Act, which makes it illegal for employers to ban workers from talking about unions or distributing literature during non-working hours.
“I haven’t seen anything like this before,” Ford says.
Bob Bussel, director of the University of Oregon’s Labor Education and Research Center, says the New Seasons employee manual’s comparisons are troubling.
“It’s an interesting juxtaposition to have ‘extremist groups’ on one side of the conjunction and unions on the other,” Bussel says.
Rohter and Jon Isaacs, Brady’s political consultant, say the important point for voters is that Brady’s work informed the core values that have made New Seasons a Portland icon.
Isaacs says those values—including wages, generous benefits and workers’ rights—have resulted in New Seasons’ employees having never sought to form a union.
“What matters,” Isaacs says, “is that what unions have to fight other employers for, they don’t have to fight for at New Seasons.”
They need to get their story straight! Her campaign manager misses the point at the end, according to their employee handbook, they weren't allowed to form a union! I bet IBEW feels pretty dumb right about now...
I had a friend in the '70s who used to call this sort of person an "afflu-hip." We had a lot of those floating around the alternative community in those days. Now some of them are millionaire business owners, who don't want their employees getting into the "old-style" adversarial union v. management politics. Brady is a phony, obviously.
This woman is such a phony that is not funny, it insults people's intelligence. The situation that is so mind boggling concerning "hiring practices" is the employee demographics at the Concordia Store. 99.9% White in a pretty much black neighborhood, gentrification or not, it does not represent the demographics of the neighborhood. Additionally, they neglect a tremendous opportunity to train and bring up from the gutter youth and adults of the area providing a place of work together with market, product and customer service education. Anyone can be trained. They must not think so.
She ought to avoid mentioning the overpriced store piggybacking on the organic marketing ride.
When are Portlanders going to demand some serious education and certification in how government works, its budgets, its labor relations, its global interaction, etc.
On the other hand, a 99.9% white educated workforce wasting their potential cooking food or stocking shelves for a living is beyond mediocre.
Dictatorial employee handbooks to keep all the slaves in check. Years ago, I had the opportunity to check employee handbooks of several companies and manager/employee conflict/problem resolution. What freedom are they talking about? What are they afraid of? That the employees would finally wake up and learn that they are taken for a ride at nearly minimum wage?
Americans have become very submisive due to economic mayhem and allowed people like this to take over and then suddenly using their "cross-dressing" demagogue and populist skills to lead us to the promise land with zero substance or credentials.
Don't fall into the mousetrap. The three candidates will just kick the can down the road, surf for a while, collect the perks as always and enjoy the benefits of the position to bring their buddies in and continue Portland's lack of economic leadership.
We need serious reformists, leaders with proven records. Leaders that have been there, done that, bought the t-shirt and all that Jazz. People with global vision to trade with the Pacific countries like never before, not nobodies that can't even propose a plan to fix this city, pave its streets, have nice parks, huge sculptures, water parks, something really big to be known for, in other words make it a destination place for commerce and turism.
I am so disappointed at the candidates. This is our time to shine and it remains cloudy and boring as it had for the last 30 years.
We demand better! Way better!
if you honestly are questioning this women's intelligence, her charismatic and compassionate way in which she goes about improving the community; the amazing qualities of a strong leader full of integrity, than you should just run in a campaign your damn self. instead of trashing her and blabbing about minimum wage, you could be out there assisting the community; plant a neighborhood garden, start a foodcart giving jobs just to the homeless. that is putting your brain to work in a productive way that will benefit more people than writing something that wont help a single person.
Wow! A fan showed up! LOL
What make you think that I do not employ and help people?
Secondly, about leadership. I am no sheep, so I refuse to think that I need her to guide me. I can see through the BS. Why can't you?
You must be very low in the totem pole of things to be impressed by a mediocre background. See, we are beyond "experimenting" with small town Mayors. Remember Clark? Remember Potter? How about Adams? You could be proud about homegrown candidates but stop and think. What do you want Portland to be? A pit stop from California to Seattle or a destination?
If you choose "destination" then you need to up your requirements about who you call a leader.
My definition of a leader is way up there, not even Obama qualifies. We have been highjacked by demagogues that have destroyed this country one city and state at the time.
For some reason Oregon has not been catapulted to recognition about doing BIG THINGS.
That is lacking and I refuse to settle for second, third best or what have you.
Oregonians need to wake up and have leadership with a global vision because we live in a global world.
You suggested that I run instead, and did so in an angry way, because I bursted your bubble. Well, I don't consider myself to be able to lead Portland because I am a reformist that would step in many "cozy toes" in order to fix things. I like transparency and accountability. I like people to work in well defined projects that are casted in stone and accepted by the voters in advance before being elected. The process is flawed. Demagogues get in, promise everything and end up doing nothing. They can't break the resistance exercised by the status quo.
I would not be a good Mayor because you are not ready for real change. Your mind is not there. In order to fix things you need revolutionary ideas instead of the same old and stale model.
So we go election cycle after election cycle getting deeper in the hole in many aspects. A good barometer is the State of the Union speeches at all levels. Same song, different singer.
I am the type of person that could say at the end of a term the following:
Poverty erradicated....check
Idea to local and global market process in place...check
Venture Capital availability for enterpreneurs...check
Infrastructure problems solved...check
Services provided and reaching its beneficiaries...check
No money in politics...check
and so on.... Get my drift?
See, we don't get that. Do you know why? It is because most people do not do due dilligence in vetting candidates. They vote on sound bites.
Which candidate has project management experience with verifyable results? Which one can say, I would do this and that by that date and will cost that much and it will be financed by so and so. No one. Why? Because they are afraid of accountability and taking responsibility.
Just a few things for you to know and about why I expect way better. Now, relax, go to your local GNC, get a truck load of St. Johns Wort pills and chill... You sound angry and anxious.
If you want to be taken seriously, don't exaggerate. There are more than .1% African-American people working at the Concordia store, and the neighborhood is not "mostly black." Also if everyone is trainable, why is it such a waste for "educated white people" to work for what you characterize as low wages, but on the other hand you seem to want more black people to be "trained" to work there? Sounds like you are making a whole lot of assumptions there about who has their education and who should be wishing and hoping to get the chance to work there. Your argument comes off as pretty inconsistent.
Just for the sake of discussion, if you go to their website, wages are $10-$14 dollars and hour for an average job. Is it a full time job? Possibly not but if it was, it is 29k a year. Whoopy dooooo! You are rich now, you made it in America at NSM. Take taxes out of the Portland millionaire figure and you are pretty much homeless.
How can people be proud to mention NSM, the "friendliest" store in town where irrelevant boring weather chat is the main topic like in any other store?
Now, here you are an American, the richest country in the world, you are white, you work at NSM and you barely make $14 an hour as an adult male, femaly or in between? What is to be proud about?
Can you raise a family? Hell no! About benefits. The benefits they talk about ought to be a right. The right to not starve by having a job and to get proper affordable care without that being use to blackmail you to be worthy of their employment.
Oh, the lawyers stressing dacronian employment laws where the employer wins 100% of the time.
Please! Yes, a lot of people are numb in the brain department and pseudo leaders like these candidates prey on ignorance and lack of action as the Union parasites do as well.
You don't need dacronian employment laws, employers or union bosses. You just need education, a job and via meritocracy achieve prosperity as an employee or on your own.
How empowered do you feel when the employer is trying to screw you, use and abouse you and then when you hit 40 or so, throw you to the curve to fend on your own like a useless rag.
Now, why an intelligent person would choose a wannabe leader that created a racket in the first place? That is insane. Always remember...
Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different result is the definition of insanity.
Who are these people? They are the people that have being doing the same, sucking your blood, the fruits of your labor for augmenting their own wealth and definitely not yours. What do you have to show for? What do they have to show for? Why would they "represent" you, lead you?
Think about it. This cancer has to be done with and the sooner the better. They keep you down. They suck your blood dry, then they dump you peniless, sick, etc as I said.
Stay away from the cheese laying in the mouse trap! Wise up!
IF you want to brag about a good store, create your own, truly employee owned and divide the profits per effort given, nothing else.
Obviously you are not aware that that in today's economy that is a very good wage for entry level employment. There are many employers paying minimum wage for jobs requiring a college education and work experience.
According to the state human services department a single person should be able to live comfortably on 1800 per month even though the reality is that only someone still living at home with their parents could live comfortably on that little income.
Thanks for bringing that to my attention but honestly, what you are saying is that it maybe okay to pay the chinese a pound of rice a day because if they eat that amount, they don't die.
Look, that an employer pays a less than subsistance wage due to current economic conditions to me equates to abuse.
What would a below subsistance wage employee do? Get another job if lucky, neglect his family and boom the nuclear family implodes.
A family wage is the minimum requirement for this employer to be patronized and allow them to grow. Anything below that is accepting abuse due to Dacronian labor laws designed and funded by these crips exploiting the American worker.
In this deal, everybody ought to come ought okay depending on merits and device the latter for self-improvement and prosperity.
Don't you believe in the American dream? If so, why lose dignity and settle for less.
Do you think that our soldiers give their life to live substandard lives? What kind of deal is that?
Me thinks that we have let these crips get away with the abuse for too long.
It is time for reform, a real one! It starts at home, our jobs, our neighborhood, our city, our state, our country and hopefully worldwide so everyone can live with dignity.
We all win if we don't step on others and outrageously profit from their effort and/or steal their life savings, their home equity and starve them to submission.
Stand up for your family, yourself and your country!
i appreciate your concern with my health; thanks. the thing is that you cant always have what you believe is the best. you have to accept that your idea of perfect is not reasonable. but if we as a people can try to forget the archetypal beliefs we have and look in the face the choices we actually have then maybe you could see that Eileen is our best choice for a leader. it doesn't make you weak to have a leader nor does it mean that you have to be a slave to the leader. history shows that we need someone to help direct us. so maybe you need to go to the library and brush up on your history.
I don't really have a dog in this race, as I don't live within Portland City limits. But I don't see the sentence as equating unions with extremist groups. Look at the key sentence as it is structured: it seeks to avoid disruption and petitioning by two things: extremist groups and promoters of adverserial relationships. It didn't equate the two, in my opinion. To have done that, the sentence would have to have been written slightly differently, as follows:
"We adhere to a consistent 'no solicitation policy' disruption and petitioning by extremist groups such as anti-human rights organizations and promoters of of the old style 'company vs. union' adverserial employee relations system."
See the difference? If you remove the second "by" just before the word "promoters" then the sentence is saying both promoters of unions and anti-human rights groups are extremists. With the second "by" in the sentence (as it was written in the manual), it is defining extremists with the example of anti-human rights groups. Period. The second "by" breaks the link between union promoters and extremists.
$0.02
Yes. This is how I see it as well.
Though let me make it clear, I'm not at all sure she's the right person for the job and, as a person who is a Portland voter, not sure I'm going to be vote for her.
Not only is she an arrogant hypocrite, she also has a foul mouth.
She makes me so sick.
The anti-union language is very clear, troubling, and illegal. "The right to form a labor organization is protected by the National Labor Relations Act. This means it is illegal for any employer to ban discussion about unions"
If employees... or anyone else, wants to talk about or promote unions in a New Seasons store, as a licensed business constrained by state and federal regulations, the store or its management have no right to censor legitmate discussion or ban union-organizing.
Facts matter.